Print Article | Email Article | Write To Us

The Cross and the Wildfire

Share
Monday, December 07, 2009 10:26 AM Comments (2)

There was an e-mail going around with some pretty dramatic photos of a California forest fire that burned in late August. The amazing thing about it was that there was a large monument in the shape of a cross that was enveloped in flames — and yet left untouched.

Gene Blevins of the Los Angeles Daily News photographed the fire in the Big Tujunga Canyon. His work can be seen here.

One person who forwarded the e-mail commented: “Even the firefighters that were near the cross as it was surrounded with flames said it was going to be destroyed. ... The next day Gene Blevins/ photographer went back to the scene to get some more shots and saw that the cross was not even touched, not even scorched from the heat.”

Some people see a sign from God in such phenomena, and that could very well be. But it’s interesting to consider what happens sometimes in wildfires.

Kevin McKee, who has lived through several California wildfires, told me this:

“Wildfires do strange things — it’s common for structures to be left untouched while everything around them is destroyed. I have a friend whose neighbors to the left, to the right and across the street lost their house, yet his (all wood, by the way) was untouched.”

McKee fretted for his own home when a fire bore down on Santa Barbara last year. “Fire tornadoes, hot spots, cold spots, explosions, oxygen depletion zones, all kinds of weird stuff goes on inside one of those firestorms,” he said. “To see something like that [cross] untouched is pretty common, which is probably why it didn’t make much news.”

Nevertheless, no doubt for some local residents, the sight of a cross left standing in the midst of destruction gives hope. It can be a symbol, too, for the rest of us, who worry about all kinds of other destruction — of the moral fabric of our society, for example — and yet the cross is still standing.

Filed under california, cross, wildfires

Comments

Post a Comment

What’s unusual here is that unlike a building that could escape a fire raging very close to it, in this case, the fire was already upon the cross and enveloping it.  There was no way out.  Even if it was not of wood, the cross should have had some sort of visible damage or blemish
upon it.  The photographer is the only one with the specific knowledge, if he did go back and he did see the cross intact.

What’s unusual here is that unlike a building that could escape a fire raging very close to it, in this case, the fire was already upon the corss and enveloping it.  There was no way out.  Even if it was not of
wood, the cross should have had some sort of visible damage or blemish upon it.  The photographer is the only one with the specific knolwedge and the only witness, if he did go back and did see the cross intact.

Post a Comment

By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.

Name:

Email:

Write your comment:

Please enter the word you see in the image below:

     

Notify me of follow-up comments.

About Staff Bloggers

Staff Bloggers
  • Get the RSS feed
Tom Wehner, John Burger, and Amy Smith are among the National Catholic Register editors and other writers who will be blogging here.

E-mail Signup

Receive our free e-mail updates!

As part of this free service, you will receive occasional special offers